2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jngse.2016.11.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Integrated simulation of multi-stage hydraulic fracturing in unconventional reservoirs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, the BEM has higher accuracy in calculating the fracture aperture and stresses than has the FEM and is applicable for predicting fracture propagation with complex topologies. These clear advantages have made the BEM popular in modeling fracture growth in 2‐D (Cheng et al, 2020; Hou et al, 2016; Olson, 2004), planar 3‐D (Tang et al, 2016; Zhang et al, 2017), nonplanar 2.5‐D (Kresse et al, 2013; Weng et al, 2011), and nonplanar 3‐D geometries (Castonguay et al, 2013; Cherny et al, 2016; Kumar & Ghassemi, 2018; Shen & Shi, 2019; Tang et al, 2019; Thomas et al, 2020b). In most of the extant literature, fluid exchange between the matrix and the fracture, and fluid flow in the matrix, is either simplified or neglected via assuming an impermeable matrix or employing the 1‐D leak‐off model suggested by Carter (1957).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the BEM has higher accuracy in calculating the fracture aperture and stresses than has the FEM and is applicable for predicting fracture propagation with complex topologies. These clear advantages have made the BEM popular in modeling fracture growth in 2‐D (Cheng et al, 2020; Hou et al, 2016; Olson, 2004), planar 3‐D (Tang et al, 2016; Zhang et al, 2017), nonplanar 2.5‐D (Kresse et al, 2013; Weng et al, 2011), and nonplanar 3‐D geometries (Castonguay et al, 2013; Cherny et al, 2016; Kumar & Ghassemi, 2018; Shen & Shi, 2019; Tang et al, 2019; Thomas et al, 2020b). In most of the extant literature, fluid exchange between the matrix and the fracture, and fluid flow in the matrix, is either simplified or neglected via assuming an impermeable matrix or employing the 1‐D leak‐off model suggested by Carter (1957).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of approaches are used to model the growth of 3D discrete fractures, including the finite element method (FEM) [14,15], extended finite element method (XFEM) [16][17][18], boundary element method (BEM) [19,20], displacement discontinuity method (DDM) [21,22], phase field method [23], and the discrete element method (DEM) [24][25][26][27]. Hybrid methods incorporate multiple methods to handle different parts of the implementation, such as solving for stress and displacement in the solid using the FEM, and managing geometry using the DEM [28][29][30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Its application can be extended to reservoir optimization [28] as well as uncertainty qualification [29]. It can also be used to the integration of the simulation of hydraulic fracturing and reservoir simulation [30], in which the fracture front is the highly nonlinear region.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%